The cross or the garden.

[Bernard Gui]

15 hours ago, Tacenda said:

There are many quotes that put the garden as the place that Christ atoned for our sins in church history.  But in quotes now, it's definitely the garden that is the beginning and the cross is the finisher.  

I believe that it's possible that some leaders wanted to break away from it being the cross since it wasn't a unique way of death since many others died on the cross.  Or something like that, at least that's what I picked up in my readings.

Here's a telling of the robbers?  Or the others that die on the cross.  http://www.truthortradition.com/articles/how-many-were-crucified-with-jesus

Quote

D&C 138:35 And so it was made known among the dead, both small and great, the unrighteous as well as the faithful, that redemption had been wrought through the sacrifice of the Son of God upon the cross.

D&c112:14 Now, I say unto you, and what I say unto you, I say unto all the Twelve: Arise and gird up your loins, take up your cross, follow me, and feed my sheep.

Anyone can put on a cross, but not everyone can take up the cross. Which is more indicative of the true Christian?

Edited March 26, 2016 by Bernard Gui

[Jim Stiles]

5 hours ago, thesometimesaint said:

I'll take the Scriptures over your philosophy of men any day.

SEE

Matthew 7:20

“Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.”

King James Version (KJV)

Quote

ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 19:30οτε ουν ελαβεν το οξος ιησους ειπεν τετελεσται και κλινας την κεφαλην παρεδωκεν το πνευμα.

Quote

John 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

When Roman prisoners served their jail sentence, I have been told that they were branded with a brand that read, "τετελεσται" meaning that the sentence has been paid in full.  Jesus said "τετελεσται" just before he died on the cross, not after leaving the garden.  This source says that the word was used for tax receipts:

http://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/69/was-%CE%A4%CE%B5%CF%84%CE%AD%CE%BB%CE%B5%CF%83%CF%84%CE%B1%CE%B9-actually-stamped-on-paid-bills-and-debt-certificates-in-the-fir

Again, I will take the scriptures over the invented ideas of man.

Disobey your masters in Salt Lake City and watch this video:

 

Edited March 26, 2016 by Jim Stiles
τετελεσται is in the present perfect tense

[Rain]

On Saturday, March 26, 2016 at 9:11 PM, Jim Stiles said:

 

Disobey your masters in Salt Lake City and watch this video:

 

The way you put it makes it sound a pretty heavy and serious thing to do.  It seems unwise to do it without more information.  Just what happens when watching this film that would make us disobedient? 

Edited March 27, 2016 by Rain

[Jim Stiles]

6 minutes ago, Rain said:

The way you put it makes it should a pretty heavy and serious thing to do.  It seems unwise to do it without more information.  Just what happens when watching this film that would make us disobedient? 

It is a video made by a Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod pastor who discusses the three ways Christ Jesus suffered on the cross: 1. Physical pain. 2. Public humiliation. 3. Wrath of God.  Jesus suffered the wrath of God on the cross for the sin of many because the Triune God hates sin.  Reference is also made to Psalm 22, which is a prophetic psalm.

Quote

Psalm 22 My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? why art thou so far from helping me, and from the words of my roaring? O my God, I cry in the day time, but thou hearest not; and in the night season, and am not silent. But thou art holy, O thou that inhabitest the praises of Israel. Our fathers trusted in thee: they trusted, and thou didst deliver them. They cried unto thee, and were delivered: they trusted in thee, and were not confounded. But I am a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised of the people. All they that see me laugh me to scorn: they shoot out the lip, they shake the head, saying, He trusted on the Lord that he would deliver him: let him deliver him, seeing he delighted in him. But thou art he that took me out of the womb: thou didst make me hope when I was upon my mother's breasts. I was cast upon thee from the womb: thou art my God from my mother's belly. Be not far from me; for trouble is near; for there is none to help. Many bulls have compassed me: strong bulls of Bashan have beset me round. They gaped upon me with their mouths, as a ravening and a roaring lion. I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint: my heart is like wax; it is melted in the midst of my bowels. My strength is dried up like a potsherd; and my tongue cleaveth to my jaws; and thou hast brought me into the dust of death. For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet. I may tell all my bones: they look and stare upon me. They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture. But be not thou far from me, O Lord: O my strength, haste thee to help me. Deliver my soul from the sword; my darling from the power of the dog. Save me from the lion's mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns. I will declare thy name unto my brethren: in the midst of the congregation will I praise thee. Ye that fear the Lord, praise him; all ye the seed of Jacob, glorify him; and fear him, all ye the seed of Israel. For he hath not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; neither hath he hid his face from him; but when he cried unto him, he heard. My praise shall be of thee in the great congregation: I will pay my vows before them that fear him. The meek shall eat and be satisfied: they shall praise the Lord that seek him: your heart shall live for ever. All the ends of the world shall remember and turn unto the Lord: and all the kindreds of the nations shall worship before thee. For the kingdom is the Lord's: and he is the governor among the nations. All they that be fat upon earth shall eat and worship: all they that go down to the dust shall bow before him: and none can keep alive his own soul. A seed shall serve him; it shall be accounted to the Lord for a generation. They shall come, and shall declare his righteousness unto a people that shall be born, that he hath done this.

The important thing is that it provides the background required for Luther's ideas about the centrality of the cross in Christian theology.  I have discovered that a similar statement was made in D&C 138:35.

Is this disobedient?  I sometimes get the impression from LDS members that they have been strongly warned about reading or listening to theology that comes from sources outside the LDS church.  This does not really take place in other Christian churches.  True, a Baptist preacher will try to convince his congregation that the Presbyterian practice of sprinkling infants is wrong, but I it is truly rare for an evangelical minister to preach directly against everything that is taught by another evangelical church or denomination.  Evangelical ministers will even use Roman Catholic sources like http://www.newadvent.org/ to study those basic doctrines that the evangelical churches and the Roman Catholic church agree with each other.  Evangelicals believe that the emphasis should be placed upon Christ and not their own particular organization.

Quote

John 3:30 He must increase, but I must decrease.

Quote

Revelation 1:18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.

 

[Rain]

15 minutes ago, Jim Stiles said:

 

Is this disobedient?  I sometimes get the impression from LDS members that they have been strongly warned about reading or listening to theology that comes from sources outside the LDS church.  This does not really take place in other Christian churches.  True, a Baptist preacher will try to convince his congregation that the Presbyterian practice of sprinkling infants is wrong, but I it is truly rare for an evangelical minister to preach directly against everything that is taught by another evangelical church or denomination.  Evangelical ministers will even use Roman Catholic sources like http://www.newadvent.org/ to study those basic doctrines that the evangelical churches and the Roman Catholic church agree with each other.  Evangelicals believe that the emphasis should be placed upon Christ and not their own particular organization.

 

You need to watch conference then. A number of things from outside are quoted,  especially from CS Lewis. There are also comparative religion classes that have readings from other sources  - I took one of them.  I've never been warned about reading outside theology,  only sources about us and against us.  

Now that that has been straightened out then back to the thread topic. If the video isn't too long I will watch it.

Edited March 26, 2016 by Rain

[Jim Stiles]

5 minutes ago, Rain said:

You need to watch conference then. A number of things from outside are quoted,  especially from CS Lewis. There are also comparative religion classes that have readings from other sources  - I took one of them.  I've never been warned about reading outside theology,  only sources about us and against us.  

Now that that has been straightened out then back to the thread topic. If the video isn't too long I will watch it.

The video is 8:04 (eight minutes not eight hours) long.

[Rain]

19 minutes ago, Jim Stiles said:

The video is 8:04 (eight minutes not eight hours) long.

I didn't assume it was 8 hours.  When I said that, I had NO idea how long it was.  It could have been 30 seconds or 60 hours.  Also when watching on my phone I never see total time,  I just see time elapsed.

Unfortuantely, it was too long tonight. Lol I'll watch later. I got about halfway through (into the third suffering ) and fell asleep. Nothing against it. Just my body telling me it is time for bed. 

Edited March 26, 2016 by Rain

[Tacenda]

21 minutes ago, Jim Stiles said:

The video is 8:04 (eight minutes not eight hours) long.

Couldn't that spiritual suffering have happened in the garden?  Can it be the first thing not the last thing or both?

[why me]

On 24.3.2016 at 5:13 PM, Tacenda said:

Near the end of His earthly ministry, the Savior went with His disciples to the Mount of Olives, to the Garden of Gethsemane…. It was there that the Savior paid the price for all the sorrows, sins, and transgressions of every human being who ever lived or ever will live. There He drank the bitter cup and suffered so that all who repent may not suffer” (Wolfgang H. Paul, “Gratitude for the Atonement,”Ensign, June 2007, 15).

 

 

As sweet as this you tube is, it lacks the cross.  

I am just reading a biography of Christ called Zealot. In this book the author claims that when christ tells his disciples to pick up the cross and follow him, Christ is actually talking about challenging the Roman authorities. We need to remember that crucifixion was a common punishment for agitators, zealots and for all those who would challenge the power of rome both before and after Christ. We see the cross as an act of willingly suffering for humanity. However, for the jews of jesus' time, the cross was a symbol of something different: to rise up against a tyranny called rome.

This would be an explanation for a Jesus of history as told by academics and historians. Historians look upon the gospel narratives not as pieces of history but as writings from followers of jesus who may just be a little biased in their story telling.

[Bobbieaware]

Duplicate

Edited March 26, 2016 by Bobbieaware

[Bobbieaware]

5 hours ago, why me said:

I am just reading a biography of Christ called Zealot. In this book the author claims that when christ tells his disciples to pick up the cross and follow him, Christ is actually talking about challenging the Roman authorities. We need to remember that crucifixion was a common punishment for agitators, zealots and for all those who would challenge the power of rome both before and after Christ. We see the cross as an act of willingly suffering for humanity. However, for the jews of jesus' time, the cross was a symbol of something different: to rise up against a tyranny called rome.

This would be an explanation for a Jesus of history as told by academics and historians. Historians look upon the gospel narratives not as pieces of history but as writings from followers of jesus who may just be a little biased in their story telling.

The author's assertion seems quite a stretch. In three of the four Bible verses where Christ commands his disciples to take up a cross and follow him, it's right after he informs them he is going to be crucified for the sins of the world. The essence of his commandment is that they too should be willing to lay down their lives for the Gospel's sake. His commandment seems to be not at all connected to one being willing to face crucifixion as a gesture of defiance against Roman authority. And in the fourth verse where Christ speaks of a disciple carrying a cross and following him, it's when he tells the rich young ruler what he must do in order to inherit eternal life. There is not even the slightest suggestion in any of the four accounts that picking up the cross has anything to do with rebellion against Rome, which is why Christ said his kingdom is not of this world. Seizing scripture verses out of context is not a good idea. Even so, I would be interested to know how the author arrives at his conclusions.

Edited March 26, 2016 by Bobbieaware

[UtahTexan]

Since He was to die for us, it seems odd to ever disregard the Cross.  The Atonement was not fulfilled with just one aspect of what happened those fateful days.  It was not Finished until Christ said, "it is finished"

[Tacenda]

https://www.facebook.com/ldsyouth/?pnref=story

None Were with Him - Jeffrey R. Holland

This shows mainly the cross....interesting.  I didn't see the Garden portrayed, but may have missed it.  Not saying the Garden shouldn't be portrayed.  

Edited March 26, 2016 by Tacenda

[Rain]

Ok Jim, watched your video now that I am awake enough.  I do agree that suffering for sins was the most important part though I can see that the shame and the physical pain may also be important so he can understand our sufferings.  Other parts of video I don't really agree with,  unless you define wrath of God differently than I am understanding it.  

[Rain]

12 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Couldn't that spiritual suffering have happened in the garden?  Can it be the first thing not the last thing or both?

Yes it can be the first thing or both.  This is what I was talking about when I said that people not members of our church don't believe in Gethsemane as part of e atonement.  Part of the reason is because they are missing some of the things found in our modern scriptures.  

I really would like to share with you some of the things found to help me with this.  Unfortuantely, I need to be on the computer, not the phone,  and my time has been limited there this past week.  Hopefully, I can do this on Monday.

[Rain]

29 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

https://www.facebook.com/ldsyouth/?pnref=story

None Were with Him - Jeffrey R. Holland

This shows mainly the cross....interesting.  I didn't see the Garden portrayed, but may have missed it.  Not saying the Garden shouldn't be portrayed.  

Interesting you posted that talk.  My son is giving a talk on the atonement and I read that talk to help him find sources about 20 minutes before you posted. The talk is centered on the loneliness felt by Christ, with the idea that we don't have to feel alone because of him and his willingness to be utterly alone. It makes sense that more was about the time leading to Calvary than Gethsemene because it is on the cross that he was alone.  The talk is beautiful and the concept may touch all those who have felt alone if they will just reach out and open the door to him.  I know at one point in my life it would have been a great balm.  I figure there must be times in the last few years where you also have felt alone.  I felt alone because I didn't feel I was worry too receive his help.  Perhaps you have felt alone because you were unsure his help was actually there when the blocks of the church seemed to teeter and fall. Perhaps not.* I highly recommend the talk for those feeling alone.

He doesn't leave Gethsemane completely alone in the talk.  Early on he talks about it,  but one may not realize the suffering done there without knowledge prior to the talk.  At the end he also talks about Christ being the paschal Lamb on Thursday in reference to Gethsemane. I know I didn't pick that up when I saw it and read it years ago.  

* I don't want to fall into the danger of pyscholanalyzing. I just know the concept had meaning in my life and I've heard many who have gone through what you have feel alone,  though not all so I thought maybe it could help those who need a hope.

[Mike Reed]

This article, "Why Should the Cross be Meaningful to Latter-day Saints," was posted yesterday on BYU's New Testament Commentary page.

Edited March 26, 2016 by Mike Reed

[Mike Reed]

You will also find an activity on LDS.org to teach children that Easter should be focused on Christ. One activity is creating an Easter bag that includes a cross.

[Joshua Valentine]

On ‎3‎/‎24‎/‎2016 at 2:02 PM, Bobbieaware said:

I believe the genesis of the 'Gethsemane only' idea found it's inspiration when some LDS Church members tried to find a way to justify why the symbology of the crucifixion appears to be unimportant in soteriology of the Latter-day Saints. But in reality, the symbology of the crucifixion of Christ is by far more important to the religion of the Latter-day Saints than it is to any other Christian religion. I say this because the highest ordinances of the Gospel are tied most dramatically to the crucifixion of Christ. Indeed, there could be no eternal families and exaltation without the applied symbolism of Christ's crucifixion found in those higher ordinances. The fact that so many members of the Church seem to miss this powerful point -- in spite of frequent temple visits-- has always been a cause of wonder to me.

First, there is historical research about the history of the use of the cross by LDS.  So, if your hypothesis is correct, there should be evidence that when LDS people stopped using the cross they also started to emphasize Gethsemane.

Second, "the symbology of the crucifixion of Christ is by far more important to the religion of the Latter-day Saints than it is to any other Christian religion," really? There's all kinds of points that could be brought to bear against this assertion: the centrality, foundational, and essential nature of the Cross in Christianity and the insufficiency, replacement, and non-essential nature of the Cross in Mormonism.  But I'll start with just your own justification and statements:

Your justification is that "the highest ordinances of the Gospel are tied most dramatically to the crucifixion of Christ".  I would like to get a clearer idea what you mean by this.  Because if you simply mean the Sacrament, then this is hardly "far more important" to Mormonism than Communion is to "any other Christian religion".  You go on saying," there could be no eternal families and exaltation without the applied symbolism of Christ's crucifixion found in those higher ordinances".  This seems to indicate that, when you speak of "higher ordinances", you are not speaking of Sacrament but of Temple Ordinances.  But, if that is the case, then you are claiming that the Cross is "far more important" in Mormonism because it is "tied most dramatically" and is essential to "higher ordinances" that few of the few LDS ever participate in.

Relatively few LDS ever go to the temple (other than as youth for proxy baptisms).  And when you say "so many members of the Church seem to miss this powerful point -- in spite of frequent temple visits" you are admitting that few of those who actually go to temple actually receive this understanding from their church teachers, leaders, and higher ordinances. So, how "far more important" could the Cross be to Mormonism than any other Christian religion, if your best evidence is some rituals that the majority of Mormons never participate in and that (apparently) the majority of Mormons who do participate in it never get the idea passed on to them by leaders or the ordinance?

[Joshua Valentine]

On ‎3‎/‎24‎/‎2016 at 1:09 PM, Boanerges said:

I agree that the focus is probably changing a bit. We latter-day saints do tend to focus on the garden while Protestants tend to focus on the cross. In our stake conference last fall, Elder Gordan Smith, Area Authority Seventy, asserted the atonement was all of it beginning in the garden, followed by the scourging and unfair trial and then the cross and ending with the resurrection. He emphasized this was all part of the atonement that overcame both spiritual and physical death. It was pretty powerful, actually. He tied it into taking the sacrament and keeping the Sabbath.

You seem to indicate that the two (the Garden and the Cross) are equal candidates for LDS and Protestant focus, that its just the case that LDS focus more on one and Protestants focus more on the other.  However, if you look to their shared scripture, the Bible, you will find that the two are not equal candidates.  The Garden of Gethsemane is only mentioned twice (I think) in all of the Bible.  The Cross, on the other hand, is not only just mentioned but emphasized throughout the New Testament.  Paul, especially, emphasized the Cross, but so too did the other New Testament writers.

If the Garden was also so important AND an essential part of the Atonement of Christ, then surely it would have been consistently partnered with references to the Cross throughout the New Testament!  How is it that is not?  If we go with "as far as it is translated correctly" then, besides "translating" having nothing to do with it, then could mistakes really have been made SO often and to such an important part of the Gospel that no one noticed? No.  If we go with "designing and corrupt priests", then why?  Why would they cut out the Garden?  What could be the motivation or the benefit?  Also, even IF they could get something by omitting the Garden, why didn't they omit all of it?  Why include the two references?  They are not essential to the history.  No one would see a hole if these two were omitted.

I don't make this point solely for you Boanerges. I actually appreciate the rest of your comment.  Your first statement was just an opportunity to bring up the above important points for people considering the Garden and the Cross to consider.

[Joshua Valentine]

On ‎3‎/‎25‎/‎2016 at 9:01 AM, Bobbieaware said:

I believe one of the reasons why the suffering in Gethsemane was emphasized is that some of the Church leaders wanted it understood, and rightly so, that Christ's atoning suffering went far beyond the physical and emotional agony experienced when someone is crucified. They wanted it understood that Christ's atoning suffering consisted mostly of a profound spiritual suffering wherein he vicariously experienced, for all of us, the full measure of punishment for all sin. That spiritual suffering included intense and exquisite feelings of guilt, shame, remorse, regret and coming to know what it's like to be cut off from the solice, comfort and soul-healing love communicated to fallen man by the indwelling of God's Spirit. But where some went wrong was that they erroneously presumed that that spiritual suffering Christ encountered -- in his case vicariously experiencing what it's like to be a son of perdition cast into hell -- was only experienced while in Gethsemanae; but as Talmage and McConkie testified, this notion is false because Christ also experienced what it's like to be utterly forsaken of God while he suffered the physical and emotional horrors of crucifixion. Stop and think about it: as if the physical and emotional agonies of crucifixion weren't enough, Christ was simultaneously called upon to experience what it"s like to be totally cut off from the presence of God forever! So what started out as a well-meaning clarification as to the extent of what Christ was really called upon to suffer when he atoned for our sins ended up being a heresy that minimized Christ's infinite and eternal agony and sorrow when he hung on Calvary's cross.

I suspect that, at best, this is close to the truth.

 

See my next post which covers this and the topic in general...

[Tacenda]

11 hours ago, CountryBoy said:

Since He was to die for us, it seems odd to ever disregard the Cross.  The Atonement was not fulfilled with just one aspect of what happened those fateful days.  It was not Finished until Christ said, "it is finished"

As I read the last line in your post, I heard Jesus say it on TV while watching a special on CNN called Finding Jesus.  It's very informative and talks about the shroud of Turan.  And they explain that it's a witness to all the final sufferings of Jesus.

[Joshua Valentine]

Some important points when considering the LDS Garden and the Cross:

1) Christ's crucifixion was the ultimate sacrifice for sins, which was prefigured by the Israelite system of Temple sacrifice.  In these rituals the sins of the faithful sinner or nation were put on, so to speak, the animal. But the sins were not atoned for by the simply carrying of the sins, nor simply by the animal bleeding (particularly by perspiration), but rather by the SHEDDING (not sweating) of blood and the DEATH of the animal.  Obviously, Christ did not die in the Garden, but he didn't even have his blood shed there.

2) Others have brought up "the cup" verses.  First, Jesus did not say "shall I not finish the cup", as if he had started in Gethsemane.  He said "will I not" as if it were a future event. I am paraphrasing here, but the point is simple enough.  And for greater and more specific evidence to the same these verses:

       Throughout the Garden scene it tells that Jesus is praying, not that he is carrying the sins of the world.  In fact, toward the END of Jesus' time in the Garden, we still have Jesus praying to the Father that the he should not drink from the cup.  However, you slice it, Jesus' prayer doesn't really make sense if he is already drinking it as he must according to LDS teaching.

       In Matthew 26:45 (right after Jesus' submission to the Father's will pertaining to "the cup") Jesus says to his disciples, "Sleep and take your rest later on.  The hour is at hand.". What hour is at hand?  The hour of Jesus Atonement.  Is he saying its already been going on for hours?  No, "at hand" indicates arriving and he connects it with the arrival of his captors: "See, the hour is at hand, and the Son of Man is betrayed into the hands of sinners".  Again, "at hand" and the "See" all indicate the arrival of the betrayer and thus the hour (which has, thus, not started yet).

3) Despite someone's comments earlier about the use of the Cross as a symbol by early Christians, the Bible is FULL of references to the Cross of Christ as the central and necessary and glorious truth of Christianity.  Paul is chalk full of references to the Cross (and never about the Garden).  The proposition that the Garden is where Jesus took upon himself the sins of the world is refuted by Peter's first letter 2:24, "Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness, by whose stripes ye are healed.". Here Peter is talking about Jesus taking on the sins of us all and does not mention the Garden but, even more, places this act at the Cross!  Obviously Paul's many statements of the Cross and Peter's and all of those in the New Testament were in line with Jesus' own description of the necessary act: "And as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up." John 3:14.

(in a previous comment I describe how impossible it would be that the Biblical texts had simply lost or had removed all of its equally numerous and significant inclusions of the Garden)

So, the Garden narrative doesn't, in itself, indicate a bearing of sins.  In fact, the narrative both does not support such an interpretation, but also resists such a revelation.  All of the Old Testament sacrificial system supports the Cross and not the Garden.  And the entire New Testament bears witness of the Cross and not the Garden.

The evidence is indicative.

And thank God for His Mercy and Grace in Christ Jesus on that day and the day we celebrate tomorrow!

[Calm]

12 hours ago, CountryBoy said:

Since He was to die for us, it seems odd to ever disregard the Cross.  The Atonement was not fulfilled with just one aspect of what happened those fateful days.  It was not Finished until Christ said, "it is finished"

It seems as odd though to disregard the Garden as it would appear Jim Stiles is telling us to (warning against theology of glory).  Surely we should be studying all of Christ's life because as you say, the Atonement was indeed not fulfilled with just one aspect of what happened those fateful days.

And to truly understand it we need to pay attention to the Cross, the Garden, the Tomb,the Supper, his baptism, his parables and so so much more.  Everything that we know of Jesus' life, every act of his mission, every word of his teaching...all of it should be treasured.

[Yirgacheffe]

On 3/26/2016 at 10:58 PM, Bernard Gui said:

Anyone can put on a cross, but not everyone can take up the cross. Which is more indicative of the true Christian?

And how do you know whether or not the person in front of you who has on a cross has not taken up the cross?  This seem rather flippant, as though your "go to" attitude is that they simply wear a cross for show.